(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2h I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
True, except no-one will remember this whole saga in a few days' time.
Unfortunately, that's probably the calculation that has been made here. Potentially (and only potentially) add another by-election which, though probably safe, would be awkward because of the circumstances of it, or protect Patterson and bank on only a few remembering it in a few weeks.
Subtle use of the work 'bank' there, after Paterson. I like it.
I don't think it counts as subtlety if it was unintentional.
Thinking back to when I briefly claimed JSA (as UC was then called), I remember the ferocious warnings given to claimants who failed to declare income in order to reduce the effective tax rate of 80-90%. People who "forgot" to mention £100 of earnings would be subject to criminals sanctions, with very little sympathy from anyone.
Conservatives have now voted to protect a colleague who received exactly 1000 times that from private companies and was then found by an all-party committee to have broken the rules on lobbying.
Having a large majority and a polling lead is encouraging the Government to think it can get away with anything. I suspect that will turn out not to be true for much longer.
I think they will get away with it at the next election anyway, but when the Torys do fall from favour, it will be hard and fast, and wont be pretty, and one even with all their friends in high places, they may never recover for years, the clock is ticking
And how far will the Conservatives have to go to find a clean pair of hands?
Has anyone asked Rishi how he'd have voted had he been in Westminster today?
If he was paired then his hands are dirty.
And it he wasn't paired, then his position in the Cabinet is untenable.
Which is why it would be of public interest to know his view on the matter.
(But the wider point is that, if BoJo comes to be seen as unfit to rule, anyone who has served under him is compromised as well.)
I’m (nearly) proud of you for (being on the verge of) doing the right thing and (trying to take credit) for the brave stand you (almost) took.
If the vote had just gone the other way, as it was close, she and others could claim credit by proxy. But it didn't. Getting sacked over an abstention is just Johnson rubbing it in her face.
Johnson can never and will never do anything but facilitate sleaze on his benches.
He is the King Rat in the sewer in terms of sleaze. Sexual, financial, you name it.
He cannot possibly EVER do anything but excuse and support the offenders, otherwise the bucket of his own sh1t, forever hanging by a thread over his own head, comes down.
I’m (nearly) proud of you for (being on the verge of) doing the right thing and (trying to take credit) for the brave stand you (almost) took.
If the vote had just gone the other way, as it was close, she and others could claim credit by proxy. But it didn't. Getting sacked over an abstention is just Johnson rubbing it in her face.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2h I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
True, except no-one will remember this whole saga in a few days' time.
Unfortunately, that's probably the calculation that has been made here. Potentially (and only potentially) add another by-election which, though probably safe, would be awkward because of the circumstances of it, or protect Patterson and bank on only a few remembering it in a few weeks.
Except the issue won't go away.
We've now got the reform of the whole process, which it looks like opposition parties will boycott. Awks.
Then OP's appeal under the new process. Which will either be a kangaroo court finding him innocent, or come to the same conclusion as the original process. Mega awks.
In any case, this drags the issue out for months. The best way to bury the issue would have been to make OP accept the punishment and send him on a 30 day trip somewhere nice, because the recall threat in a seat like his is no threat at all.
But one of the key beliefs of Johnsonism is short-termism; never put off until tomorrow something unpleasant that can be spread out over months in the future.
I hope that is true. That they tried to be clever to save a friend and at the same time neuter a process most of them dislike anyway, assuming they'd stir up some criticism but it'd swiftly get lost, and then it turns out their own solution helps drag it out.
Thinking back to when I briefly claimed JSA (as UC was then called), I remember the ferocious warnings given to claimants who failed to declare income in order to reduce the effective tax rate of 80-90%. People who "forgot" to mention £100 of earnings would be subject to criminals sanctions, with very little sympathy from anyone.
Conservatives have now voted to protect a colleague who received exactly 1000 times that from private companies and was then found by an all-party committee to have broken the rules on lobbying.
Having a large majority and a polling lead is encouraging the Government to think it can get away with anything. I suspect that will turn out not to be true for much longer.
I think they will get away with it at the next election anyway, but when the Torys do fall from favour, it will be hard and fast, and wont be pretty, and one even with all their friends in high places, they may never recover for years, the clock is ticking
And how far will the Conservatives have to go to find a clean pair of hands?
Has anyone asked Rishi how he'd have voted had he been in Westminster today?
If he was paired then his hands are dirty.
And it he wasn't paired, then his position in the Cabinet is untenable.
Which is why it would be of public interest to know his view on the matter.
(But the wider point is that, if BoJo comes to be seen as unfit to rule, anyone who has served under him is compromised as well.)
His view on this, and other matters, is whatever they need to be at any given moment I suspect.
Thinking back to when I briefly claimed JSA (as UC was then called), I remember the ferocious warnings given to claimants who failed to declare income in order to reduce the effective tax rate of 80-90%. People who "forgot" to mention £100 of earnings would be subject to criminals sanctions, with very little sympathy from anyone.
Conservatives have now voted to protect a colleague who received exactly 1000 times that from private companies and was then found by an all-party committee to have broken the rules on lobbying.
Having a large majority and a polling lead is encouraging the Government to think it can get away with anything. I suspect that will turn out not to be true for much longer.
I think they will get away with it at the next election anyway, but when the Torys do fall from favour, it will be hard and fast, and wont be pretty, and one even with all their friends in high places, they may never recover for years, the clock is ticking
And how far will the Conservatives have to go to find a clean pair of hands?
Has anyone asked Rishi how he'd have voted had he been in Westminster today?
If he was paired then his hands are dirty.
And it he wasn't paired, then his position in the Cabinet is untenable.
Which is why it would be of public interest to know his view on the matter.
(But the wider point is that, if BoJo comes to be seen as unfit to rule, anyone who has served under him is compromised as well.)
This is the hubris of perceived supremacy - of more than a decade in power, endless opinion poll leads and an election won with a majority of 80.
They believe they will never lose - people will always vote Conservative over Labour and the others - and that empowers them to think, do and act as they see fit.
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
Things get politicised, but that doesn't mean each side is equally at fault. Boris chose this fight, he and his supporters are the catalysing factor in this.
Hello all Tory MPs: what exactly is your explanation for a colleague taking £100,000 and then lobbying a government agency and ministers on behalf of that company that is totally above board and complies with “natural justice”? https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1455994060020277259
Entirely off topic, but knowing we have experts here on nearly everything I was wondering if we had anyone with a lot of knowledge on Ash Dieback.
Walking the dog in the Surrey Hills (they start at the end of my road) and also in some hills near Petworth I noticed that all the Ash were either dead or nearly dead. No survivors at all. But I also noticed they were all young. I then looked up how to approximately age them by girth and by the looks of it nothing was older than the storm of 1987.
I have about a dozen Ash in my garden and a number of them are old in terms of the life span of the Ash. One has a girth of just under 4 metres making it about 300 years old which is very mature for an Ash. Many of the others are in the 100 to 200 year range. Up till now none have shown any signs of Ash dieback although I am getting worried about one that is probably only a few decades old.
Does anyone know why mine are more resilient considering it is rampant nearby and has age got anything to do with it? Should I be worried. I have already lost a very large old one quite a few years ago (pre Ash dieback, just fell over, needed acrows to hold it up so it could be chopped up it was so big, nearly wiped out several fruit trees) and I don't want to lose anymore as they are huge and stunning.
How the hell can Boris manage to go from a decent appearance at COP to a complete own goal for the opposition. For the first time ever this is actually real sleaze and it's self inflicted. Insane.
Hello all Tory MPs: what exactly is your explanation for a colleague taking £100,000 and then lobbying a government agency and ministers on behalf of that company that is totally above board and complies with “natural justice”? https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1455994060020277259
How the hell can Boris manage to go from a decent appearance at COP to a complete own goal for the opposition. For the first time ever this is actually real sleaze and it's self inflicted. Insane.
NEW: In Glasgow we were told Boris Johnson was flying back to London after #COP26 due to "significant time constraints". Now we know what these were... Scoop from our @NickSommerlad
There's a nasty brutal element to the Johnson regime. Absolute loyalty or you swim with the fishes. Eddie Mair had it right when he called Johnson a nasty piece of work.
"“Almost the only people who think Johnson a nice guy are those who do not know him.” - Max Hastings
How the hell can Boris manage to go from a decent appearance at COP to a complete own goal for the opposition. For the first time ever this is actually real sleaze and it's self inflicted. Insane.
Well not helped by chartering an airliner to get home from Glasgow. Even if you don't believe in what you are doing at COP at least give the appearance of doing so by returning by train. Maybe the plan was to keep that out of the news by doing something even more insane.
Just saw the earlier French Presidential polling from Harris.
Irrespective of the LR candidate, Zemmour is running second at 17-18% in front of Le Pen at 15-16%.
Macron beats Zemmour 62-38 in a hypothetical run-off while Bertrand and Le Pen lose 46-54. If Zemmour runs, Macron will win easily on this evidence.
Have the polled Barnier? I think he could win if he makes the final two.
Both Bertrand and Barnier can beat Macron. Le Pen would probably lose narrowly (although I think she is fully capable of winning). Zemmour would get ground into the dust by Macron.
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
The clown just burned that bridge.
It was politicised before the vote. The fact none of the Opposition MPs voted Aye is part of that.
I assume you still haven't read the full report. I'm not having a go at you but, seriously, if you read it all I think you'd change your view. The concerns you raise are all covered in the report, and Paterson had ample opportunities to make his case built in to the process. He took advantage of this, but neither the Commissioner nor the MPs and lay members on the Committee were persuaded by his 'defence'. His complaints about the process, and the response to them, are covered in the report. He really hasn't got a leg to stand on, and if you read it, as a bright enough person, I think you'd agree.
If the system needs reforming, the HoC can do that. But not post hoc following a judgement made under the current system.
How the hell can Boris manage to go from a decent appearance at COP to a complete own goal for the opposition. For the first time ever this is actually real sleaze and it's self inflicted. Insane.
Hardly the first time. Its been open corruption for yonks now. A mere coincidence that peerages, PPE contracts and planning agreements are doled out to Tory donors. Obviously.
How the hell can Boris manage to go from a decent appearance at COP to a complete own goal for the opposition. For the first time ever this is actually real sleaze and it's self inflicted. Insane.
Well not helped by chartering an airliner to get home from Glasgow. Even if you don't believe in what you are doing at COP at least give the appearance of doing so by returning by train. Maybe the plan was to keep that out of the news by doing something even more insane.
Stupid of course, but that's not important. I'm happy that the PM should travel the fastest way where that's needed.
Johnson can never and will never do anything but facilitate sleaze on his benches.
He is the King Rat in the sewer in terms of sleaze. Sexual, financial, you name it.
He cannot possibly EVER do anything but excuse and support the offenders, otherwise the bucket of his own sh1t, forever hanging by a thread over his own head, comes down.
A quite colourfully put and accurate analysis. Thank you
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
The clown just burned that bridge.
It was politicised before the vote. The fact none of the Opposition MPs voted Aye is part of that.
Why should they if they think to vote "aye" would bring Paiament into disrepute?
In this instance Conservatives politicised a cross party process that was introduced by the Conservatives in 1995.
You really can't shoulder the blame onto anyone else when one particular party has been so outrageously partisan in order to protect one of their own.
According to Sam Coates earlier today even Labour MPs were telling him that they agreed that the system was flawed and should be reformed, but they didn't want to vote so because of Paterson. If they think the system was flawed then they should have voted with their conscience and not politicised it.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2h I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
True, except no-one will remember this whole saga in a few days' time.
That's where I am
I might have been exercised by this 5 or 10 years ago, maybe, maybe baby, but now? In the middle of a global plague and after ALL THAT SHIT??
It's Tories gonna Tory, to me. Regrettable but forgettable
That's probably a moral failing in me, but I wonder if I am more like the average punter in this narrow respect. Yawn
Just saw the earlier French Presidential polling from Harris.
Irrespective of the LR candidate, Zemmour is running second at 17-18% in front of Le Pen at 15-16%.
Macron beats Zemmour 62-38 in a hypothetical run-off while Bertrand and Le Pen lose 46-54. If Zemmour runs, Macron will win easily on this evidence.
Have the polled Barnier? I think he could win if he makes the final two.
Both Bertrand and Barnier can beat Macron. Le Pen would probably lose narrowly (although I think she is fully capable of winning). Zemmour would get ground into the dust by Macron.
I think both Le Pen and Bertrand are worth backing at current odds, as both push Macron closely, and could win with a swing in the campaign.
It's hard to see value in the current odds on Macron.
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
The clown just burned that bridge.
It was politicised before the vote. The fact none of the Opposition MPs voted Aye is part of that.
Why should they if they think to vote "aye" would bring Paiament into disrepute?
In this instance Conservatives politicised a cross party process that was introduced by the Conservatives in 1995.
You really can't shoulder the blame onto anyone else when one particular party has been so outrageously partisan in order to protect one of their own.
According to Sam Coates earlier today even Labour MPs were telling him that they agreed that the system was flawed and should be reformed, but they didn't want to vote so because of Paterson. If they think the system was flawed then they should have voted with their conscience and not politicised it.
Let's be honest: you never gave a flying fig about the parliamentary-standards process until this came up and it all started looking terrible for friend Boris.
"Ex-England international Gary Ballance has said he "regrets" using a racial slur against his former Yorkshire team-mate Azeem Rafiq.
In a lengthy and emotional statement, Ballance said he was responsible for some of the offensive terms Rafiq was subjected to during his time at Headingley.
"It has been reported that I used a racial slur and, as I told the independent enquiry, I accept that I did so and I regret doing so," said Ballance, 31.
"To be clear - I deeply regret some of the language I used in my younger years.""
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2h I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
True, except no-one will remember this whole saga in a few days' time.
That's where I am
I might have been exercised by this 5 or 10 years ago, maybe, maybe baby, but now? In the middle of a global plague and after ALL THAT SHIT??
It's Tories gonna Tory, to me. Regrettable but forgettable
That's probably a moral failing in me, but I wonder if I am more like the average punter in this narrow respect. Yawn
It's drip, drip, drip though. Eventually the bucket is full. That may be 7 or 8 years, mind.
This is the hubris of perceived supremacy - of more than a decade in power, endless opinion poll leads and an election won with a majority of 80.
They believe they will never lose - people will always vote Conservative over Labour and the others - and that empowers them to think, do and act as they see fit.
Partly. Although the utter depravity and sense of entitlement of Johnson personally is also a problem. Narcissism is hardly unknown in politics but he has won the silver medal in the event at a canter (the gold/orange medal was never in doubt).
"Ex-England international Gary Ballance has said he "regrets" using a racial slur against his former Yorkshire team-mate Azeem Rafiq.
In a lengthy and emotional statement, Ballance said he was responsible for some of the offensive terms Rafiq was subjected to during his time at Headingley.
"It has been reported that I used a racial slur and, as I told the independent enquiry, I accept that I did so and I regret doing so," said Ballance, 31.
"To be clear - I deeply regret some of the language I used in my younger years.""
How the hell can Boris manage to go from a decent appearance at COP to a complete own goal for the opposition. For the first time ever this is actually real sleaze and it's self inflicted. Insane.
Hardly the first time. Its been open corruption for yonks now. A mere coincidence that peerages, PPE contracts and planning agreements are doled out to Tory donors. Obviously.
This smells somewhat different.
It isn't just the blatant corruption this time so much as the outrageous shoot-up-the-town broad daylight jail-break to free Paterson.
Just saw the earlier French Presidential polling from Harris.
Irrespective of the LR candidate, Zemmour is running second at 17-18% in front of Le Pen at 15-16%.
Macron beats Zemmour 62-38 in a hypothetical run-off while Bertrand and Le Pen lose 46-54. If Zemmour runs, Macron will win easily on this evidence.
Have the polled Barnier? I think he could win if he makes the final two.
Both Bertrand and Barnier can beat Macron. Le Pen would probably lose narrowly (although I think she is fully capable of winning). Zemmour would get ground into the dust by Macron.
I think both Le Pen and Bertrand are worth backing at current odds, as both push Macron closely, and could win with a swing in the campaign.
It's hard to see value in the current odds on Macron.
Well, Macron will be in the final two (short of something extraordinary happening). He will face one of the following five opponents:
Bertrand (60% chance of beating Macron) Barnier (50% chance) Le Pen (33% chace) Zemmour (5%) Melanchon (2%)
Right now, Zemmour leads Le Pen leads the LR candidate. It's possible LR comes through, and maybe even likely that Le Pen beats out Zemmour. But right now, Macron is rightly the odds on favourite.
"Ex-England international Gary Ballance has said he "regrets" using a racial slur against his former Yorkshire team-mate Azeem Rafiq.
In a lengthy and emotional statement, Ballance said he was responsible for some of the offensive terms Rafiq was subjected to during his time at Headingley.
"It has been reported that I used a racial slur and, as I told the independent enquiry, I accept that I did so and I regret doing so," said Ballance, 31.
"To be clear - I deeply regret some of the language I used in my younger years.""
Presumably Ballance is the Zimbo.
I suspect his future at Yorkshire is in the Ballance.
Just saw the earlier French Presidential polling from Harris.
Irrespective of the LR candidate, Zemmour is running second at 17-18% in front of Le Pen at 15-16%.
Macron beats Zemmour 62-38 in a hypothetical run-off while Bertrand and Le Pen lose 46-54. If Zemmour runs, Macron will win easily on this evidence.
Have the polled Barnier? I think he could win if he makes the final two.
Both Bertrand and Barnier can beat Macron. Le Pen would probably lose narrowly (although I think she is fully capable of winning). Zemmour would get ground into the dust by Macron.
The latest Elabe has Le Pen still second on 19% with Zemmour on 13% and Bertrand on 13% (Barnier if he is the LR candidate not Bertrand is on just 8%).
I mean the police had a revolving door on Tony Blair's Downing St. for years (though they could never actually get him on anything ) - The public shrugged and carried on voting for him.
Politicians like Blair and Boris get away with "sleaze" where others like Major, Brown and May don't... This story will have minimal impact.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2h I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
True, except no-one will remember this whole saga in a few days' time.
That's where I am
I might have been exercised by this 5 or 10 years ago, maybe, maybe baby, but now? In the middle of a global plague and after ALL THAT SHIT??
It's Tories gonna Tory, to me. Regrettable but forgettable
That's probably a moral failing in me, but I wonder if I am more like the average punter in this narrow respect. Yawn
You probably are. I couldn't really care less what politicians get up to as long as they enact policies I like. I guess if one were undecided it might flip them over to the so called good guys though. I think if actual criminals were in charge, but keeping the country running well/enacting policies I like, I'd be ok with it
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
The clown just burned that bridge.
It was politicised before the vote. The fact none of the Opposition MPs voted Aye is part of that.
Why should they if they think to vote "aye" would bring Paiament into disrepute?
In this instance Conservatives politicised a cross party process that was introduced by the Conservatives in 1995.
You really can't shoulder the blame onto anyone else when one particular party has been so outrageously partisan in order to protect one of their own.
According to Sam Coates earlier today even Labour MPs were telling him that they agreed that the system was flawed and should be reformed, but they didn't want to vote so because of Paterson. If they think the system was flawed then they should have voted with their conscience and not politicised it.
There's a nasty brutal element to the Johnson regime. Absolute loyalty or you swim with the fishes. Eddie Mair had it right when he called Johnson a nasty piece of work.
I suspect you are right. And that absolutely makes me want to vote for Boris
Post Covid, post Brexit, life is going to hard for Britain, for quite a while. I want some mean nasty fucker with ambition and guile in charge of the country, I don't want the bumbling well-meaning Sir Kir Royale
Yes Boris is cunning and cruel. Perfect. I reckon it was this side that surprised Macron, and entirely blind-sided him, with AUKUS. Hence Macron's enormous pique
"Ex-England international Gary Ballance has said he "regrets" using a racial slur against his former Yorkshire team-mate Azeem Rafiq.
In a lengthy and emotional statement, Ballance said he was responsible for some of the offensive terms Rafiq was subjected to during his time at Headingley.
"It has been reported that I used a racial slur and, as I told the independent enquiry, I accept that I did so and I regret doing so," said Ballance, 31.
"To be clear - I deeply regret some of the language I used in my younger years.""
Thinking back to when I briefly claimed JSA (as UC was then called), I remember the ferocious warnings given to claimants who failed to declare income in order to reduce the effective tax rate of 80-90%. People who "forgot" to mention £100 of earnings would be subject to criminals sanctions, with very little sympathy from anyone.
Conservatives have now voted to protect a colleague who received exactly 1000 times that from private companies and was then found by an all-party committee to have broken the rules on lobbying.
Having a large majority and a polling lead is encouraging the Government to think it can get away with anything. I suspect that will turn out not to be true for much longer.
Nick, I asked earlier, and no one replied, is there anything here that looks potentially like criminality rather than unparliamentary behaviour.
Bearing in mind some Labour MPs did jail time for the expenses scandal. Is being paid to ask questions in the house unlawful? Genuine question.
As others have now said, I don't think it's criminal. In many societies it's of course commonplace for members of Parliament to take up issues that they have received money for - I doubt if it would raise many eyebrows in the US, let alone Russia. Britain has tried to maintain a higher standard, but by Parliamentary self-regulation through a cross-party committee. It's that tradition that has been broken here, and I think that inevitably one has to conclude that the law should ban such activities, since MPs have proved unwilling to respect the system.
Doesn't criminality depend on a police report, and the charge.
Misconduct in a Public Office is conceivable.
(Which always makes me smile as it sounds like illicit nookie at work.)
The offence is committed when:
a public officer acting as such; wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself; to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder; without reasonable excuse or justification.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2h I don’t understand the politics in this Owen Patterson vote. What’s the upside for Boris and the government. What does he think he gets out of it. Complete gift for Labour.
True, except no-one will remember this whole saga in a few days' time.
That's where I am
I might have been exercised by this 5 or 10 years ago, maybe, maybe baby, but now? In the middle of a global plague and after ALL THAT SHIT??
It's Tories gonna Tory, to me. Regrettable but forgettable
That's probably a moral failing in me, but I wonder if I am more like the average punter in this narrow respect. Yawn
It's drip, drip, drip though. Eventually the bucket is full. That may be 7 or 8 years, mind.
Clearly today’s shenanigans are deeply shameful for the conservatives, if they had any shame that is. But the problem is the less politically engaged public, I.e. the 99.9% who don’t post obsessive on pb, won’t care that much, and even if they do, they will probably think that all politicians are the same. Now that may not be fair, but that’s what happens. And to be honest the idea that the conservatives are uniquely bad in this doesn’t really wash. I recall the last labour government. A fair few scandals in that one too. Mandelson? Baroness Scotland? Blunket? And the SNP is not immune. Poor old Nippy has such a poor memory that she should probably be disbarred from office... So a terrible day, and one that will enrage many, especially on pb, but it will be a tiny ripple by the weekend for the public at large.
Just saw the earlier French Presidential polling from Harris.
Irrespective of the LR candidate, Zemmour is running second at 17-18% in front of Le Pen at 15-16%.
Macron beats Zemmour 62-38 in a hypothetical run-off while Bertrand and Le Pen lose 46-54. If Zemmour runs, Macron will win easily on this evidence.
Have the polled Barnier? I think he could win if he makes the final two.
Both Bertrand and Barnier can beat Macron. Le Pen would probably lose narrowly (although I think she is fully capable of winning). Zemmour would get ground into the dust by Macron.
I think both Le Pen and Bertrand are worth backing at current odds, as both push Macron closely, and could win with a swing in the campaign.
It's hard to see value in the current odds on Macron.
Well, Macron will be in the final two (short of something extraordinary happening). He will face one of the following five opponents:
Bertrand (60% chance of beating Macron) Barnier (50% chance) Le Pen (33% chace) Zemmour (5%) Melanchon (2%)
Right now, Zemmour leads Le Pen leads the LR candidate. It's possible LR comes through, and maybe even likely that Le Pen beats out Zemmour. But right now, Macron is rightly the odds on favourite.
It's a neat mirror image of the British situation.
Macron/Johnson is eminently beatable. But the right/left are unwilling to unite round a candidate mainstream enough to do this, preferring to push for someone who makes them feel good, rather than being able to win.
I mean the police had a revolving door on Tony Blair's Downing St. for years (though they could never actually get him on anything ) - The public shrugged and carried on voting for him.
Politicians like Blair and Boris get away with "sleaze" where others like Major, Brown and May don't... This story will have minimal impact.
When Blair was interviewed by plod over cash for gongs he was already out of office and Brown was PM. It seriously damaged his reputation. For me at least
Just saw the earlier French Presidential polling from Harris.
Irrespective of the LR candidate, Zemmour is running second at 17-18% in front of Le Pen at 15-16%.
Macron beats Zemmour 62-38 in a hypothetical run-off while Bertrand and Le Pen lose 46-54. If Zemmour runs, Macron will win easily on this evidence.
Have the polled Barnier? I think he could win if he makes the final two.
Both Bertrand and Barnier can beat Macron. Le Pen would probably lose narrowly (although I think she is fully capable of winning). Zemmour would get ground into the dust by Macron.
The latest Elabe has Le Pen still second on 19% with Zemmour on 13% and Bertrand on 13% (Barnier if he is the LR candidate not Bertrand is on just 8%).
There's a nasty brutal element to the Johnson regime. Absolute loyalty or you swim with the fishes. Eddie Mair had it right when he called Johnson a nasty piece of work.
I suspect you are right. And that absolutely makes me want to vote for Boris
Post Covid, post Brexit, life is going to hard for Britain, for quite a while. I want some mean nasty fucker with ambition and guile in charge of the country, I don't want the bumbling well-meaning Sir Kir Royale
Yes Boris is cunning and cruel. Perfect. I reckon it was this side that surprised Macron, and entirely blind-sided him, with AUKUS. Hence Macron's enormous pique
You've been reading SeanThomas in the Speccie again haven't you? He's like Fox News, he makes the angry, angrier.
There's a nasty brutal element to the Johnson regime. Absolute loyalty or you swim with the fishes. Eddie Mair had it right when he called Johnson a nasty piece of work.
I suspect you are right. And that absolutely makes me want to vote for Boris
Post Covid, post Brexit, life is going to hard for Britain, for quite a while. I want some mean nasty fucker with ambition and guile in charge of the country, I don't want the bumbling well-meaning Sir Kir Royale
Yes Boris is cunning and cruel. Perfect. I reckon it was this side that surprised Macron, and entirely blind-sided him, with AUKUS. Hence Macron's enormous pique
He sees himself as a Roman emperor. He'll probably fall like one as well.
We then have the suspension clause which only comes into effect if the suspension from the Committee on Standards is longer than 10 sitting days, There is where my lack of knowledge of the process exists - does an MP not have the right of appeal to the Committee of Standards and can an MP not bring evidence to the Committee in support of their innocence?
If the answer is no, you have a point but if the answer is yes, frankly you don't as the process (with its appeal elements) will have been undertaken. If of course an MP has no right of appeal to the Committee on Standards, that seems curious to this observer and is a different question worth considering.
The biggest problem is that "standards" are being enforced by other MPs. Who guards the guardians etc.
To be honest, does anyone believe the recall would have reached the numbers and even if it had, would the Conservatives be in any serious danger of losing the seat where Paterson is hanging on by his fingertips to a 23,000 majority (50% more than Chesham & Amersham)?
The Tories were clearly afraid it would at the least reach recall numbers. There's no reason for the urgency otherwise.
I doubt anyone thought the by-election, if reached, would be lost though, and we know they have reselected people facing a recall before.
I don't like the idea of recall elections to be honest. Hard on the constituents of their MP is sidelined for 30 days butt hey can always punish him at the next election.
I'm in two minds on recall of MPs. I do think if you have it it should be relatively hard, because you don't want it triggered based on temporary issues of popularity or minority recalcitrant opinion or trivialities, but on the other hand I can see that it does not add a great deal when triggered by suspension that could not be dealt with at a future election.
On balance I could probably support expanding disqualification to cover anyone convicted of a crime, and do away with recall.
I think the problem with that is that it could be abused so that spurious prosecutions or illegality of the form of, for example, protest, could be used to remove MPs against the wishes of their constituents. There are good reasons for ensuring that only the voters get to choose who their MP is. It is hopefully not the case that the current administration or their successors would do such a thing but you can see how it could be abused by an administration not interested in protecting the democratic process.
That's exactly the mechanism the Kremlin used to stop Navalny from standing for election.
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
The clown just burned that bridge.
It was politicised before the vote. The fact none of the Opposition MPs voted Aye is part of that.
Why should they if they think to vote "aye" would bring Paiament into disrepute?
In this instance Conservatives politicised a cross party process that was introduced by the Conservatives in 1995.
You really can't shoulder the blame onto anyone else when one particular party has been so outrageously partisan in order to protect one of their own.
According to Sam Coates earlier today even Labour MPs were telling him that they agreed that the system was flawed and should be reformed, but they didn't want to vote so because of Paterson. If they think the system was flawed then they should have voted with their conscience and not politicised it.
Let's be honest: you never gave a flying fig about the parliamentary-standards process until this came up and it all started looking terrible for friend Boris.
Actually as soon as I read Paterson's allegations against the Report I said that was troubling and it should go to an appeal.
I've always cared about due process etc and have always thought that the rules of justice should be applied.
I've been involved in chairing disciplinary proceedings in the past and vigorously ensuring that the right procedures are followed is something I've always cared about - and I've always known that any decisions I make could be appealed internally beyond me, and further appealed to tribunal etc externally too.
I absolutely see no reason why that should not be the case here, and the partisan pointscoring by those who recognise there's an issue but want to score a political hit is unattractive.
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
The clown just burned that bridge.
It was politicised before the vote. The fact none of the Opposition MPs voted Aye is part of that.
Why should they if they think to vote "aye" would bring Paiament into disrepute?
In this instance Conservatives politicised a cross party process that was introduced by the Conservatives in 1995.
You really can't shoulder the blame onto anyone else when one particular party has been so outrageously partisan in order to protect one of their own.
According to Sam Coates earlier today even Labour MPs were telling him that they agreed that the system was flawed and should be reformed, but they didn't want to vote so because of Paterson. If they think the system was flawed then they should have voted with their conscience and not politicised it.
Let's be honest: you never gave a flying fig about the parliamentary-standards process until this came up and it all started looking terrible for friend Boris.
Actually as soon as I read Paterson's allegations against the Report I said that was troubling and it should go to an appeal.
I've always cared about due process etc and have always thought that the rules of justice should be applied.
I've been involved in chairing disciplinary proceedings in the past and vigorously ensuring that the right procedures are followed is something I've always cared about - and I've always known that any decisions I make could be appealed internally beyond me, and further appealed to tribunal etc externally too.
I absolutely see no reason why that should not be the case here, and the partisan pointscoring by those who recognise there's an issue but want to score a political hit is unattractive.
Comments
Which is why it would be of public interest to know his view on the matter.
(But the wider point is that, if BoJo comes to be seen as unfit to rule, anyone who has served under him is compromised as well.)
He is the King Rat in the sewer in terms of sleaze. Sexual, financial, you name it.
He cannot possibly EVER do anything but excuse and support the offenders, otherwise the bucket of his own sh1t, forever hanging by a thread over his own head, comes down.
I don't think we're that lucky.
The whole thing stinks from both directions, this shouldn't be politicised.
They believe they will never lose - people will always vote Conservative over Labour and the others - and that empowers them to think, do and act as they see fit.
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1455994060020277259
Walking the dog in the Surrey Hills (they start at the end of my road) and also in some hills near Petworth I noticed that all the Ash were either dead or nearly dead. No survivors at all. But I also noticed they were all young. I then looked up how to approximately age them by girth and by the looks of it nothing was older than the storm of 1987.
I have about a dozen Ash in my garden and a number of them are old in terms of the life span of the Ash. One has a girth of just under 4 metres making it about 300 years old which is very mature for an Ash. Many of the others are in the 100 to 200 year range. Up till now none have shown any signs of Ash dieback although I am getting worried about one that is probably only a few decades old.
Does anyone know why mine are more resilient considering it is rampant nearby and has age got anything to do with it? Should I be worried. I have already lost a very large old one quite a few years ago (pre Ash dieback, just fell over, needed acrows to hold it up so it could be chopped up it was so big, nearly wiped out several fruit trees) and I don't want to lose anymore as they are huge and stunning.
Irrespective of the LR candidate, Zemmour is running second at 17-18% in front of Le Pen at 15-16%.
Macron beats Zemmour 62-38 in a hypothetical run-off while Bertrand and Le Pen lose 46-54. If Zemmour runs, Macron will win easily on this evidence.
"Never let a pal down."
He is one of the best MPs that money can buy.
*Strangely, yet conveniently, the Minister responsible couldn't help with the standards enquiry as he had "lost" his phone.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-races-back-cop-25371485#ICID=ios_TMNewsApp_AppShare_Click_TWshare
In this instance Conservatives politicised a cross party process that was introduced by the Conservatives in 1995.
You really can't shoulder the blame onto anyone else when one particular party has been so outrageously partisan in order to protect one of their own.
He might be upset at that characterisation, though I might suggest the first step in people forgiving you for poor behaviour is to acknowledge it.
If the system needs reforming, the HoC can do that. But not post hoc following a judgement made under the current system.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1455840925482160131
I might have been exercised by this 5 or 10 years ago, maybe, maybe baby, but now? In the middle of a global plague and after ALL THAT SHIT??
It's Tories gonna Tory, to me. Regrettable but forgettable
That's probably a moral failing in me, but I wonder if I am more like the average punter in this narrow respect. Yawn
It's hard to see value in the current odds on Macron.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/59155576
"Ex-England international Gary Ballance has said he "regrets" using a racial slur against his former Yorkshire team-mate Azeem Rafiq.
In a lengthy and emotional statement, Ballance said he was responsible for some of the offensive terms Rafiq was subjected to during his time at Headingley.
"It has been reported that I used a racial slur and, as I told the independent enquiry, I accept that I did so and I regret doing so," said Ballance, 31.
"To be clear - I deeply regret some of the language I used in my younger years.""
That may be 7 or 8 years, mind.
It isn't just the blatant corruption this time so much as the outrageous shoot-up-the-town broad daylight jail-break to free Paterson.
Bertrand (60% chance of beating Macron)
Barnier (50% chance)
Le Pen (33% chace)
Zemmour (5%)
Melanchon (2%)
Right now, Zemmour leads Le Pen leads the LR candidate. It's possible LR comes through, and maybe even likely that Le Pen beats out Zemmour. But right now, Macron is rightly the odds on favourite.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1455913494021345286?s=20
Le Pen is on 46% to 54% for Macron
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1455912685183307777?s=20
The latest Elabe has Le Pen still second on 19% with Zemmour on 13% and Bertrand on 13% (Barnier if he is the LR candidate not Bertrand is on just 8%).
https://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/presidentielle-2022.pdf
Politicians like Blair and Boris get away with "sleaze" where others like Major, Brown and May don't... This story will have minimal impact.
It looks awful. And it looks exclusively like the work of the Conservatives.
Post Covid, post Brexit, life is going to hard for Britain, for quite a while. I want some mean nasty fucker with ambition and guile in charge of the country, I don't want the bumbling well-meaning Sir Kir Royale
Yes Boris is cunning and cruel. Perfect. I reckon it was this side that surprised Macron, and entirely blind-sided him, with AUKUS. Hence Macron's enormous pique
Misconduct in a Public Office is conceivable.
(Which always makes me smile as it sounds like illicit nookie at work.)
The offence is committed when:
a public officer acting as such;
wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself;
to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder;
without reasonable excuse or justification.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/misconduct-public-office
And to be honest the idea that the conservatives are uniquely bad in this doesn’t really wash. I recall the last labour government. A fair few scandals in that one too. Mandelson? Baroness Scotland? Blunket? And the SNP is not immune. Poor old Nippy has such a poor memory that she should probably be disbarred from office...
So a terrible day, and one that will enrage many, especially on pb, but it will be a tiny ripple by the weekend for the public at large.
Macron/Johnson is eminently beatable. But the right/left are unwilling to unite round a candidate mainstream enough to do this, preferring to push for someone who makes them feel good, rather than being able to win.
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1455911681394098179?s=20
I've always cared about due process etc and have always thought that the rules of justice should be applied.
I've been involved in chairing disciplinary proceedings in the past and vigorously ensuring that the right procedures are followed is something I've always cared about - and I've always known that any decisions I make could be appealed internally beyond me, and further appealed to tribunal etc externally too.
I absolutely see no reason why that should not be the case here, and the partisan pointscoring by those who recognise there's an issue but want to score a political hit is unattractive.